+Facilitating a

Feedback Loop

through GradeMark

and TurningPoint:

A Workshop

Dr Christie Harner, Dr Alison Graham, Dr Sara

Marsham, and Miss Caitlin Oliver

15th Durham

Blackboard

Users’

Conference

6th - 7th

January 2015

+ Aims of ProjectInitial aims: To engage students in the

entire marking process from the setting

of marking criteria through the receipt

and feed-forward application of

feedback

• To write/design effective marking

criteria that are specific to pieces of

work.

• To engage students in the process of

using marking criteria in preparation

for an assignment

• To provide feedback on coursework

that links directly to marking criteria

• Use GradeMark to develop libraries of

feedback comments that can function

much like dialogue with students

Implicit questions in our

original proposal:

1. Can we involve students

in writing marking

criteria?

2. What do students already

know about marking

criteria?

3. Can typed (even

repeated!) comments

work like a dialogue? Will

students recognise this?

+Year One: Bioremediation (Stage 3)

Aim 1: Write new marking criteria

Create new

assignment: a grant

application.

Write new

marking criteria.

Revise.

Engage

students

with

criteria.

+Aim Two: Engaging students with

marking criteria

Objective #1 – to help students

understand the wording in the

marking criteria

Objective #2 – to encourage

students to start differentiating

between the descriptions of

different grade boundaries and

spotting what will help them to

achieve high marks

Objective #3 – to engage

students in the practice of peer

marking (marking existing

student work against the set of

criteria)

+BIO3020 – Marking criteria session

+Aims Three and Four: Use Grademark to provide

feedback linked to marking criteria

GradeMark is:

• Part of Turnitin software, accessed at Newcastle University through

Blackboard

• A platform through which students submit coursework online as Word

document or PDF (or in other file formats)

• A platform through which markers can provide three types of feedback:

o In-text comments: Bubble comments, Text comments, QuickMark

comments

o Rubric

o General comments: Voice comments and Text comments

+

Library comment

Text comment

Bubble comment

Final comment

Using GradeMark: Types of Comments

+

Add

assignment-

specific,

module-

specific,

School or

Faculty-wide

marking

criteria

Mark each piece

of work according

to the rubric; use

qualitatively or

quantitatively

GradeMark: Using the rubric

+What did the students think?

75% found it useful to have the marking criteria in advance

100% thought it was useful to see how they performed against the

marking criteria

100% preferred electronic feedback to feedback on a pro forma or

mark sheet

100% thought electronic marking encourages more positive feedback

100% found the comments to be specific to the piece of work

100% would like to have received more electronic feedback in other

modules

+Student questionnaire – BIO3020

+Our reflections after Year One:

Benefits for students:

1) feedback is easier to read and is automatically saved online; 2) students can access

feedback in private and on their own time; 3) more positive feedback; 4) increased

perceptions of fairness with rubric; 5) more detailed

Benefits for staff:

1) No printing/scanning for retention; 2) Linked to originality check; 3) More detailed

comments with less work; 4) Library bank of comments helps to avoid repetition; 5) Easy

record of submission and return of feedback

BUT:

• At what stages will this be most useful? When do we most need to engage

students?

• Are we writing the criteria in a way that will best engage students?

• Can we involve students in writing the criteria?

+Year Two: Stage 1 Microbiology

Figure out what

students know

about lab reports.

Write new

marking criteria

based on student

knowledge.

Engage

students

with

criteria.

+BIO1004 – Lab report focus group

If students do not know what a ‘scientific paper’ is, and have never read a peer-

reviewed article, then how can the marking criteria be used to make

expectations clear?

+BIO1004 – Lab report focus group

+Activity: Design Marking Criteria

• Use the hand-out provided to design marking criteria for a

lab report.

• What terms would you define? What terms would you ask

students to ‘figure out’ independently?

• How can you balance students’ lack of prior knowledge with

a pedagogical desire to encourage independent learning?

Ten to fifteen minutes / Groups of 2 or 3

+Activity: Design Marking Criteria

• What do your criteria look like?

• What guidelines should we remember when we’re writing

criteria?

• How can we make sure that we include the student

perspective?

+Years Two and Three: Our Criteria

+Our reflections & questions for you:

Are there ‘good practice’ guidelines for writing marking criteria?

Can students be engaged to write the marking criteria themselves?

What strategies can be used to engage students with marking criteria?

What is the balance between in-class time and independent engagement?

What next?